You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 30 May 2019

About the service:

Fairview Farm is a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties. It was registered to support up to 22 people. 19 people were using the service. There was also a respite facility where people could stay for a period of time. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However, the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the building design fitting into the residential area and the other large domestic homes of a similar size. There were deliberately no identifying signs, industrial bins or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service received planned and co-ordinated person-centered support appropriate for them.

People’s experience of using this service:

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support in the following ways:

People's consent was gained before any care was provided, and they were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives.

People were supported in the least restrictive way possible.

People were able to take part in a range of activities and outings and their independence was promoted.

People and their family were involved in care planning as much as was possible.

People received safe care. Staff understood safeguarding procedures. Risk assessments were in place to reduce and manage risks within people’s lives.

Staff recruitment procedures ensured that appropriate pre-employment checks were carried out.

Medicines were stored and administered safely.

Staffing support matched the level of assessed needs within the service during our inspection.

Staff were trained to support people effectively. Staff were supervised well and felt confident in their roles.

People were supported to have a varied diet. Healthcare needs were met, and people could see health professionals as needed.

Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect, and spent time getting to know them.

Care plans reflected people likes, dislikes and preferences. A complaints system was in place and was used effectively.

The manager was open and honest, and worked in partnership with outside agencies to improve people’s support when needed. Audits of the service were detailed. Any issues found were addressed promptly.

The service had a registered manager in place, and staff felt well supported by them.

The service met the characteristics for a rating of Good in all of five key questions we inspected. Therefore, our overall rating for the service after this inspection was Good. More information is in the full report.

Rating at last inspection: Requires Improvement (report published September 2017)

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 30 May 2019

The service was safe.

Details are in our Safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 30 May 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our Effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 30 May 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our Caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 30 May 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our Responsive findings below.

Well-led

Good

Updated 30 May 2019

The service was well-led

Details are in our Well-Led findings below.